Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[yuma]

At this point I am really only interested in furthering the discussion in terms of how I think Teproc is hiding behind his "policy" of this in an attempt to cast suspicion on me and ultimately perhaps getting me lynched

[ashersky]

Isn't it unusual for yuma to be advancing a plan by the way ? I thought he was usually anti-claim ? I think it's scummy here because the plan looks horrible to me and has already prompted people to say too much, as well as the fact that it distracts from scumhunting, but I wonder what that should tell me about yuma.

vote: teproc

This post looks like teproc is trying to find a way to justify his "policy vote" with a pseudo-real reason.

But let's talk about this:

I am against claiming in dumb ways w/o thinking about things. I have claimed before in games. I am not against claiming. I am also not interested in plans that are intended to be game breaking as I feel they break the spirit of the game.

What I am interested in is looking at the setup and finding ways to potentially use the setup to an advantage as it is intended. I feel like I have always done this, but with most setups it is quickly apparent that there is no reason to discuss claiming or anything else as it is quite obvious that we can't get much out of it.

This is not the case here. If you want to disagree with me about finding a way to create an advantage then I don't know what to say... I think that you are at fault for disagreeing with me here based off one bad experience in a game where it was fairly obvious (DWII) that claiming would net zero benefits.

I believe that if we do have a SK turned town that is worth the loss of WIFOMed information to mafia in return for an IC. You have played with an IC Teproc. You should know that an IC is very valuable.

Regardless of your alignment, your stance of "claiming is bad ALWAYS" is wrong. It should be "claiming is bad most of the time, it is worth some discussion to find out unless it is blatantly obvious that there is no benefit" but that is a lot longer to type out so I can understand why you woulnd't want it as your motto. Could I suggest an acronym? CIBMOTTISWSDTFOUIIBOTTISNB? Yeah, that is pretty long too.

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

[theorel]

This is pretty quiet for a 15-player game.  But I guess RMM13 is going strong, and has several crossover players.
I'm gonna vote: joth to see if he shows up.  Pretty sure he's the only person who actually hasn't posted.

[yuma]

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

I guess that is possible.

[yuma]

I find people voting for Andrew scummy.

I find you scummy for finding me scummy!

But really why are we scummy?

Because I don't think the "case" on him is good at all.

oh right the case...

Which you ask about here...

Why are robz, Yuma, and theorel voting for Andrew?

But then don't give either Robz or I a chance to explain what that case might be?
Robz does post immediately after so maybe you saw him online or something and knew he wasn't going to respond, but I certainly never received a chance to explain myself.

Now... the fact of the matter is that there isn't a case, at least not from my perspective. My vote was to follow Robz's vote due to the small exchange that they had about random lynching.

But the point remains that I feel that you slowly and deliberately constructed a scenario in which you attempted to make it look like you were concerned about the andrew wagon, simulated wanting to find out more and then reacted in a way that you had already pre-determined to behave regardless of how or whether people responded

[AndrewisFTTW]

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

I guess that is possible.

Either way, that's a weird post from Teproc and I'm comfortable keeping my vote there.

But the point remains that I feel that you slowly and deliberately constructed a scenario in which you attempted to make it look like you were concerned about the andrew wagon, simulated wanting to find out more and then reacted in a way that you had already pre-determined to behave regardless of how or whether people responded

Now that's interesting; and very possible.

[mail-mi]

This is pretty quiet for a 15-player game.  But I guess RMM13 is going strong, and has several crossover players.
I'm gonna vote: joth to see if he shows up.  Pretty sure he's the only person who actually hasn't posted.

I dig it. vote: joth

[Robz888]

Have we gotten anything from Scott or ADK yet?

[scott_pilgrim]

Have we gotten anything from Scott or ADK yet?

Yeah, man, those guys need to post more...vote: scott_pilgrim

[scott_pilgrim]

Have we gotten anything from Scott or ADK yet?

Yeah, man, those guys need to post more...vote: scott_pilgrim

Okay I'm here, sorry.  So far it looks like people have just been talking about theory, and whether they should be talking about theory.  I don't mind theory talk but I don't think anyone has come up with anything big and I don't expect them to.  The SK plan seems pointless, they should already have decided for themselves whether to claim.  I think there's this idea that once we stop talking about theory suddenly people will get into arguments and the social deduction mayhem will ensue, but I don’t see why they can’t coincide, I mean maybe it clutters up the thread, so that's a thing.

Has anyone done anything scummy yet?  I don't think so, I guess I'm kind of in spectator mode until something exciting happens, which I know is not the best way to play but there you go.  Man I feel like I say that every game D1.  You guys can vote me for lurking if you like, but joth has posted less than me so why not vote him instead.

Okay instead of being super unhelpful let me try to think about what has happened this game.  People talked about theory.  Then people talked about whether they should talk about theory.  Teproc cluttered up the thread a bit talking about how theory talk clutters up the thread, whether he netted a positive or negative or equal amount of clutter by saying that over and over again, I don't know.  But is he scummy for it?  I mean I feel like maybe there's something there, but really it just doesn't tell us anything.  Robz hasn't claimed IC status yet, so that's something.  I guess what interests me is why are people voting for Teproc, I still don't really get it.  Are all four of those votes actually serious?  (Not "actually" as in are you guys crazy, "actually" as in I'm making sure I know what's happening.)  And if they are I assume they're like, well this is the scummiest we've seen but I'm just waiting to see what happens, and not like, let's lynch Teproc guys he's totally scum.

[scott_pilgrim]

Have we gotten anything from Scott or ADK yet?

Yeah, man, those guys need to post more...vote: scott_pilgrim

Okay I'm here, sorry.  So far it looks like people have just been talking about theory, and whether they should be talking about theory.  I don't mind theory talk but I don't think anyone has come up with anything big and I don't expect them to.  The SK plan seems pointless, they should already have decided for themselves whether to claim.  I think there's this idea that once we stop talking about theory suddenly people will get into arguments and the social deduction mayhem will ensue, but I don’t see why they can’t coincide, I mean maybe it clutters up the thread, so that's a thing.

Has anyone done anything scummy yet?  I don't think so, I guess I'm kind of in spectator mode until something exciting happens, which I know is not the best way to play but there you go.  Man I feel like I say that every game D1.  You guys can vote me for lurking if you like, but joth has posted less than me so why not vote him instead.

Okay instead of being super unhelpful let me try to think about what has happened this game.  People talked about theory.  Then people talked about whether they should talk about theory.  Teproc cluttered up the thread a bit talking about how theory talk clutters up the thread, whether he netted a positive or negative or equal amount of clutter by saying that over and over again, I don't know.  But is he scummy for it?  I mean I feel like maybe there's something there, but really it just doesn't tell us anything.  Robz hasn't claimed IC status yet, so that's something.  I guess what interests me is why are people voting for Teproc, I still don't really get it.  Are all four of those votes actually serious?  (Not "actually" as in are you guys crazy, "actually" as in I'm making sure I know what's happening.)  And if they are I assume they're like, well this is the scummiest we've seen but I'm just waiting to see what happens, and not like, let's lynch Teproc guys he's totally scum.

Thank you for that profoundly insightful post, unvote

[scott_pilgrim]

I guess what interests me is why are people voting for Teproc, I still don't really get it.  Are all four of those votes actually serious?

Oh, well at least theorel has moved his vote since then.  But I was wondering theorel why did you vote for Teproc when you gave Robz a higher scum score.  Do you base your vote off of like a product of scum score and number of votes that person already has?  (Well plus a constant or something because otherwise you would automatically not lynch anyone who doesn't have any votes.)

[scott_pilgrim]

I guess what interests me is why are people voting for Teproc, I still don't really get it.  Are all four of those votes actually serious?

Oh, well at least theorel has moved his vote since then.  But I was wondering theorel why did you vote for Teproc when you gave Robz a higher scum score.  Do you base your vote off of like a product of scum score and number of votes that person already has?  (Well plus a constant or something because otherwise you would automatically not lynch anyone who doesn't have any votes.)

Wait the four count is still right because yuma has voted Teproc since the last vote count, I confused myself.  4+1-1=4.  Okay I'm done talking to myself now.

[Teproc]

Isn't it unusual for yuma to be advancing a plan by the way ? I thought he was usually anti-claim ? I think it's scummy here because the plan looks horrible to me and has already prompted people to say too much, as well as the fact that it distracts from scumhunting, but I wonder what that should tell me about yuma.

vote: teproc

This post looks like teproc is trying to find a way to justify his "policy vote" with a pseudo-real reason.

My vote on you was not a policy vote. I voted for you because I believe the plan you proposed :
1) Had no chance of being followed
2) Got people to talk about things they shouldn't talk about

The post you're quoting here is just me realizing that you talking about theory might be unusual, and asking about it to the crowd of people who have more games with you. And then stating the reasons I was voting for you for clarity's sake.

Regardless of your alignment, your stance of "claiming is bad ALWAYS" is wrong. It should be "claiming is bad most of the time, it is worth some discussion to find out unless it is blatantly obvious that there is no benefit" but that is a lot longer to type out so I can understand why you woulnd't want it as your motto. Could I suggest an acronym? CIBMOTTISWSDTFOUIIBOTTISNB? Yeah, that is pretty long too.

This is not my stance at all. I'm not against claiming, I'm against theory talk on day 1. I think plans can be useful on later days, and I would say the theory talk we had in day2 of GoT would have been very good if the setup had been right.

DWII is not the only game that led me to this. DoP is the other one, in that it convinced me that plans on D1 will simply not be followed, even if they're good. I think the rolling numbers thing was a good plan then, but people kept misunderstanding it.

Genuine question : how many times has a plan been executed on f.ds day 1 ? In a normal game I mean ? Mafia XXX is the only one that comes to mind. And sure, that was an example of a great plan that worked perfectly. But how many games have been lost because people don't have the energy to reread or because someone VT slipped which helped scum kill the PRs ?

Scott_pilgrim has a point that my opposition to theory talk has probably cluttered up the thread, which is obviously pretty awful, but I guess we've got a wagon now, so that's good at least.

[Teproc]

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

What ? That doesn't actually make sense.

[Teproc]

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

What ? That doesn't actually make sense.

I guess I'll elaborate :

why would a SK be uncomfortable about that ? The point of the plan is for a converted SK to claim... so what does that have to do with anything ? If I'm SK and I see this discussion, I'm probably considering wether or not it's good for me to (fake)claim, but I'm not sure why I would be nervous about the conversation itself.

[theorel]

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

What ? That doesn't actually make sense.

I guess I'll elaborate :

why would a SK be uncomfortable about that ? The point of the plan is for a converted SK to claim... so what does that have to do with anything ? If I'm SK and I see this discussion, I'm probably considering wether or not it's good for me to (fake)claim, but I'm not sure why I would be nervous about the conversation itself.

A SK can just be uncomfortable being mentioned, because they want to kind of hide in the sidelines with no one thinking about them.  As an example, my first game (MIV), I was shot for mentioning the SK like 5-6 times during day-1, even though every time was essentially, "This might be SK behavior, but I'm not interested in going after the SK."

[jotheonah]

I have a lot of catching up to do, but I don't have time now.

[mcmcsalot]

I find people voting for Andrew scummy.

I find you scummy for finding me scummy!

But really why are we scummy?

Because I don't think the "case" on him is good at all.

oh right the case...

Which you ask about here...

Why are robz, Yuma, and theorel voting for Andrew?

But then don't give either Robz or I a chance to explain what that case might be?
Robz does post immediately after so maybe you saw him online or something and knew he wasn't going to respond, but I certainly never received a chance to explain myself.

Now... the fact of the matter is that there isn't a case, at least not from my perspective. My vote was to follow Robz's vote due to the small exchange that they had about random lynching.

But the point remains that I feel that you slowly and deliberately constructed a scenario in which you attempted to make it look like you were concerned about the andrew wagon, simulated wanting to find out more and then reacted in a way that you had already pre-determined to behave regardless of how or whether people responded

blegh, really?  It's not like I am voting for any of you and why should I be forced to wait for you to asnwer. I asked why people were voting because I couldnt see any case on him, this makes me find his voters scummy. I didn't need to ask for what the case was on him to know it was crap. I just don't see how that equates to me manufacturing a scenario where I can find the andrew voters scummy.

I guess how was i supposed to go about expressing my scum read on the andrew wagon which i felt was made of nothing, and figure out if any of the wagoners really felt they had a strong case? or should I just not do that?

[Teproc]

Yuma, this is what you are discussing, right?

If anything, I think it reads like Teproc is the SK and doesn't like all the talk about him specifically.

What ? That doesn't actually make sense.

I guess I'll elaborate :

why would a SK be uncomfortable about that ? The point of the plan is for a converted SK to claim... so what does that have to do with anything ? If I'm SK and I see this discussion, I'm probably considering wether or not it's good for me to (fake)claim, but I'm not sure why I would be nervous about the conversation itself.

A SK can just be uncomfortable being mentioned, because they want to kind of hide in the sidelines with no one thinking about them.  As an example, my first game (MIV), I was shot for mentioning the SK like 5-6 times during day-1, even though every time was essentially, "This might be SK behavior, but I'm not interested in going after the SK."

Interesting, although that might be him suspecting you to be mafia (since SK hunting is generally more beneficial to mafia than to town I think).

[EFHW]

Vote Count 1.5

Teproc (4): AndrewisFTTW, Axxle, XerxesPraelor, yuma
Axxle (1): mcmcsalot
AndrewisFTTW (1): Robz888
sudgy (1): A Drowned Kernel
XerxesPraelor (1): sudgy
yuma (2): Teproc, Voltaire
jotheonah (2): Theorel, mail-mi


Not voting (3): ashersky, jothenoah, scott_pilgrim

With 15 alive, it takes 8 to lynch

Day 1 ends at 10:00 a.m. on April 8, 2014

[yuma]

My vote on you was not a policy vote. I voted for you because I believe the plan you proposed :
1) Had no chance of being followed
2) Got people to talk about things they shouldn't talk about

The post you're quoting here is just me realizing that you talking about theory might be unusual, and asking about it to the crowd of people who have more games with you. And then stating the reasons I was voting for you for clarity's sake.

How is that not a policy vote though? It is based on arbitrary requirements that have no bearing on someone being scum or not...

And it was never a plan. Because a plan requires coordinated efforts of multiple people to come together--and they very rarely do, I agree with you there--here it was pointing out something that may or may not have been fully obvious to the very player that it was impacting. I know that when I looked at it I wasn't sure what the right course of action would be if I was said player--hence wanting to have a discussion about it so said player could be informed and make an intelligent decision--we are all smart here, don't get me wrong, but this is a complex setup with a lot of things that can easily be overlooked.

So what I see you doing is voting me for what I call policy, but maybe you don't? Regardless for reasons that are arbitrary and then searching out legitimate reasons to justify your vote.

[A Drowned Kernel]

So it seems like people have stopped talking about theory and have are now talking about whether people should be lynched for wanting to talk about theory or not wanting to talk about theory, but...

People have brought up the possibility of number-claiming, and isn't that something we'd pretty much have to do day one in order for it to be useful? I assume that information isn't included in the flip. For that matter, would a converted SK flip as such, or would they flip as a VT?

As to who's scummy or not: it's hard to tell since most of the talk has been theory talk (besides the random wagon on Andrew) or people arguing over whether theory talk is good or not, and I have no real experience with that matter- I've never been in a game where a mass claim happened early on. I do find Axxle a little scummy for his repeated "I'll be back when theory talk is over", you can talk about stuff while other people are talking you know, or even try to stop them from doing it. Making excuses to lurk at the very least seems anti-town.

Vote: Axxle

[yuma]

I am not using theory as a reason to vote!

I am saying teproc used a stance against theory talk to vote for me then tried to find a way to justify his vote on me, which I find scummy... hiding behind something then looking to justify it...

so stop saying i am voting off theory! i don't care scum hunting wise what people think theory wise, I am voting off what I perceive to be scummy behavior.

[Teproc]

How is that not a policy vote though? It is based on arbitrary requirements that have no bearing on someone being scum or not...

It's not a policy vote because I think what you did was legitimately scummy, not just something I disagreed with. My vote is not on theorel on ashersky, it is on you because I believe your SK plan (or whatever you want to call it) could very well be a scum ploy to make town reveal stuff about their roles or lack thereof which also had the added benefit of prolonging theory talk.

This isn't arbitrary, it isn't a policy vote, it's a serious vote based on thinking you're the player the most likely to be scum right now. That you're trying to pass it off as an unreasonable vote when it clearly isn't is only increasing this in my eyes.